similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm-config curses-related failures

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Eli > > I don’t know a workaround which will keep support for coloured terminal > output, but if you can live without it then passing these to configure > should work. > > --enable-curses=no > --enable-terminfo=no > > Re-doing the configure & build in a new directory solved

Hi Eli I don’t know a workaround which will keep support for coloured terminal output, but if you can live without it then passing these to configure should work. --enable-curses=no --enable-terminfo=no Thanks, Pete On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to build some code that relies on LLVM as a library

On 6/16/14, 1:14 PM, Dan Liew wrote: > Hi Joseph, > >> In other words what does " put '--std=c++11' in the CXXFLAGS” mean? Do you >> have an example of what it would look like? or what should I read in order >> to learn this? I’m happy to read up but I don’t know where to start reading >> (besides the getting started page on llvm) :) > >

Hi Pavel, thank you for you response. objdump -T showed that there are no symbols defined in liblldb.so. After few compilations I found that problem is with linking with LLD (-DLLVM_ENABLE_LLD=ON) without the directive everything is ok. Hana ============= $ objdump -T lib64/liblldb.so lib64/liblldb.so: file format elf64-x86-64 DYNAMIC SYMBOL TABLE: 0000000000000000 w D *UND*

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:20:55PM -0500, Joseph wrote: > Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64: > "_del_curterm", referenced from: > terminalHasColors(int) in libLLVMSupport.a(Process.o) Need to link against libterminfo / libtinfo / libncurses, depending on your platform. Alternatively, disable terminfo support via cmake/configure. Joerg

Hi Eli, Thanks for the link! I'm able to compile a standalone pass outside of the source tree, and I'm obviously ably to compile analysis groups inside the source tree. However, the problem comes when I try to do what the tutorial suggests to create an analysis group outside of the source tree. My understanding is that building out of tree requires different methods to register the

Hi Mehdi, Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? Steven Shi Intel\SSG\STO\UEFI Firmware Tel: +86 021-61166522 iNet: 821-6522 From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 2:13 PM To: Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> Cc: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > > Now get rid of pre-2.6 Python support ;-) Not only it helps clean-up code, > by 2-and-3 coexistence is much easier. > > It looks like Daniel was able to add py3k support fairly cleanly. I'm not sure how much of a difference removing pre-2.6 support would make at this point. (also, let's

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 29 July 2016 at 17:50, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > > While I think the 6-month mark is artificial (what's wrong about a vague > > "several months"? these are policies/guidelines, not legal contracts), > > I'm ok with that, too. > >

Ping? On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > While doing various profiling runs of llc, it's easy to notice that > some wall-clock time is not accounted for by -time-passes (e.g. only 7 > out of 9.2 seconds for compiling gcc). Some of the "lost" time is in > reading the bitcode file (~ 1 sec). When reading

Hi Steven, > On May 29, 2016, at 11:28 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? I wrote it on trunk, but I expect it to be fairly easy to port on 3.8. This is really just quickly plumbing an option on the TargetMachine creation. --

Whoops... Seems I forgot the asterisk (*) after the cast. Or something. Because I did insert the cast and it didn't work. But NOW it works. Thank you for spending some time on this - and also for presenting the solution. -- Mikael 2013/12/4 Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> > This code: > > declare i32 @printf(i8* nocapture readonly, ...) nounwind > > define

On 9 September 2013 01:09, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote: > I think depending on curses is gross, > I totally agree, but I also don't have a better way of doing this. I agree with Joerg that hard-coding escape sequences is not the way forward. Even though curses is available on pretty much every OS, there are hacks you have to do to port across OSs, especially old

Hi, llvm recently switched to using terminfo for detecting if terminals support escape codes. There's some discussion about this after the commit happened here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130805/183590.html After the discussion, it looks like the approach was switched from depending on curses on just terminfo. From what I gather (the changelog didn't

Hi! I'm trying to compile tinc-vpn 1.1pre3 on Ubuntu 12.10, but I get this error: checking curses.h usability... no checking curses.h presence... no checking for curses.h... no configure: error: "curses header files not found." (See the attached text file for the output when running ./configure) I have searched on google after this error message but I can't find anything

On Apr 17, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 4/17/2013 12:15 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > Give a compelling argument and I might :) > > The cost is the extra time spent verifying that the binaries are fresh. In my

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote: > On 9 September 2013 01:09, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote: > >> I think depending on curses is gross, >> > > I totally agree, but I also don't have a better way of doing this. I agree > with Joerg that hard-coding escape sequences is not the way forward. >

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > >> > I'm fine with this as long as llvm-dwarfdump gets maintained. > >> > > >> > >> I agree, and as I said in the original email, in the long term I > >> believe llvm-dwarfdump is the correct solution. > >> > > > > The problem is that if

On Feb 11, 2013, at 18:13, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Erik Verbruggen <erikjv at me.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I noticed that llvm-dwarfdump does not show any information about the eh_frame section. While DWARFContext::getDebugAranges explicitly tries to parse it, it fails because the DWARFContextInMemory

OK, fine -- an example of MCJIT that sets up for PTX JIT would also be helpful. On Dec 6, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > > You'll have to switch to MCJIT for this purpose. Legacy JIT doesn't emit PTX. > > Eli -- Larry Gritz lg at larrygritz.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: